<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2008 (4) TMI 16 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3604</link>
    <description>SC dismissed the appeals, holding the assessee entitled to exemption under s.10(23) as its objects are exclusively charitable and it qualifies as an Act of General Public Utility under s.2(15). The Court found Question B covered by an earlier HC decision which the Revenue did not challenge and thus attained finality; Question B must follow Question A, for which leave had been declined on that basis. Because Question B was already decided by the prior HC ruling, the appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2025 11:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=42955" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (4) TMI 16 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3604</link>
      <description>SC dismissed the appeals, holding the assessee entitled to exemption under s.10(23) as its objects are exclusively charitable and it qualifies as an Act of General Public Utility under s.2(15). The Court found Question B covered by an earlier HC decision which the Revenue did not challenge and thus attained finality; Question B must follow Question A, for which leave had been declined on that basis. Because Question B was already decided by the prior HC ruling, the appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3604</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>